Mukesh Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with Case Crime No.01 of 2020, registered at police station Vigilance Establishment Sector, Dehradun, District Dehradun. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

As per the First Information Report, Mr. Pradeep Pant, Inspector, Vigilance Sector, Dehradun lodged a First Information Report on 08.01.2020 that he had conducted an open enquiry regarding the rigging in the Gram Panchayat Development Officer Examination, 2016, in which, serious irregularities were found. Charge-sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation.

Heard Mr. S.R.S. Gill, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Special Counsel for the State.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Special Advocate for the State, contended that the role of the present applicant is that he (applicant) had collected money from the candidates for getting them selected and handed over the said money to Rajesh Kumar Chauhan, who was the owner of the Company, RMS Techno Solution Pvt. Ltd. The RMS Techno Solution Pvt. Ltd was given contract to conduct the said examination.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the statements given by Surya Pratap and Nagendra Singh during the investigation. It has been stated by Surya Pratap that he had given Rs.12.00 Lakh (Rupees Twelve Lakh) to the applicant, after receiving money from his mother by selling her jewellery and giving his land to his brother Ravi. As per statement of Nagendra Singh, he had given Rs.6.00 Lakh (Rupees Six Lakh) to the applicant after receiving the money from his mother by selling her jewellery and by taking Rs.1.00 Lakh (Rupees One Lakh) from his relative.

Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate contended that applicant is an innocent person. He has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The statements of Surya Pratap and Nagendra Singh are false. Applicant had not received any money from them. The Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of the mother and brother of the witness Surya Pratap and the mother of the witness Nagendra Singh to corroborate the statements of these witnesses. Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate has further submitted that co-accused Rajesh Kumar Chauhan was granted bail by the Special Judge, Vigilance Establishment on 28.10.2022. Applicant is in judicial custody since 11.10.2022. He has no criminal history. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant- Mukesh Kumar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without previous permission of the Trial Court.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, Prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.